On March 8th, international women day, the CMS experiment at CERN will be run almost entirely by women. 32 of the 34 shifts needed to run our experiment will be covered by women scientists of our Collaboration - which counts 588 women overall.

I think this is great news and a very good idea. 588 women scientists are quite an impressive force! And believe me, most of them really do kick ass!!

Comments

Omg. In my humble opinion this thing is totally pointless -- not being glad about the number and presence of women scientists at cern and supporting it of course, but these "symbolic moves". What does it mean? Does having to point out the fact there are also women there signify something good about the rest of the year? Why is having some runs by female crew important for either the experiment or women? But then again I'm the person who's totally against with "turning our lights off for one hour to help the earth cause".

Eleni, methinks you are really a bit too much of a snob. This is not really an important initiative, but one which aims with some success at broadcasting an image of openness in science. Physics in particular has traditionally been the ivory tower of male scientists, and showing the world that it appears to be otherwise is not so bad. Of course we must do more, true. But I do not see obvious other ways yet.

No, I just believe that shifting the focus (in these "symbolic moves" again) can even get to be harmful to the cause. I'm also afraid it's less acceptable for men to disagree with such moves with respect to women so I prefer to voice it. Other possible ways could have been a fancy press event about how the rates of women at cms/cern/science have increased (if they have, I'm just guessing) over the years, an announcement about important advances in experimental physics achieved by women, or even details about the special obstacles women have to overcome. I'm sorry but I can't help feeling that all-female shifts is extremely superficial, especially for a scientific institution...

I was the 5th woman in the history of the Institute of Theoretical Astrophysics, and I was furious that the men failed to tell me that there had been women there before me - and that they excelled in their field. (There were some 25 years since the last woman had been at the Institute when I moved in). Role models are important! Take it from an expert (see above).

My hat off for the CERN management that decided to go for this 'stunt'. :-)

Well, you're certainly one of those role models, Bente, especially considering that there are only around 6,000 astrophysicists in the world--male and female combined! So, you belong to a pretty small and very exclusive club just by virtue of that. : )

This is a "nice" holiday to celebrate in the top high-energy facility in the EU(SSR). ...

The first International Women's Day was observed in the U.S. on February 28th, 1909, by a declaration of the Socialist Party of America. Next year, in 1910, the celebrations went international when they were adopted by the Second Socialist International in Copenhagen.

For obvious reasons, this holiday was quickly fading away since the late 1920s. But it was revived by feminism in the 1960s. Going back in time, celebrations of the International Women's Day were the first rallies that ignited the October Revolution in Russia and helped to decimate democracy in the world's largest country for more than 70 years. Following the October Revolution, the Bolshevik Feminist Alexandra Kollontai persuaded Lenin to make it the official holiday in the USSR. So they did it but it was a working day for some time. It became a non-working day in the USSR in 1965.

In Czechoslovakia, the day would always be connected with parties of fat old obnoxious communists, both male and female ones. The latter would always include Ms Marie Kabrhelova, a top female communist, who was really disgusting.

Well, Marx, Lenin, Engels, Stalin, and others were men. Most evil - and most good - in the world has been done by men. ;-)...

I an not blaming women for the October Revolution. I am blaming the International Women's Day whose role for the October Revolution was vastly higher than expected from their importance measured otherwise.

Yes, men are somewhat smarter than women. Most importantly, they have a higher standard deviation of IQ - by about 10% - which is responsible for the big discrepancy of men and women in the tails, especially the upper one.

Dear Bente, thanks for your amusing comment and your deep argument. Could you please just clarify what I am exactly ignorant about in this context? Thanks! ;-) Let's just pray that the LHC will survive until Tuesday.

Ignorance: reference to pre-historic statistics and the fact that women's achievements are made invisible throughout history as well as today (ref. CERN). This is basic knowledge and therefore I dare call it ignorance. There are multiple scientific surveys showing that women excels - in other words are more intelligent than men. But I think statistics are meaningless in this context and fail to serve any purpose when it comes to measuring qualities of men and women. It is really hard to measure intelligence in the first place and being objective is even harder.

In my view communists view on women as work horses as good as any is one of the good things of that political system. Demonstrating beautifully how much politics, religion and other societal factors color our view of the sexes and their abilities.

I'm not sure if I throw pearls before swine here; I guess I will find out shortly. :-)

it may be difficult for most women to measure IQ but it is somewhat easier for most men: just ask people to solve IQ tests and carefully compute the statistical distributinos. The results, as summarized e.g. at

are that the mean IQ value of men is 3-4 points - i.e. 20-25 percent of a standard deviation - higher than the mean IQ value of women. That also rules out your statement with the opposite sign. Once again, as an explanation of the huge male-vs-female discrepancy e.g. in the number of Fields medals and physics/chemistry Nobel prizes, the 10% bigger male standard deviation is somewhat more important a part of the story that the slightly higher mean value.

Knowledge of pre-historic statistics is not ignorance: it's knowledge and knowledge is always the opposite thing than ignorance. ;-) It may be an inconvenient knowledge but it is still knowledge, not ignorance.

In a 2008 study paid for by the National Science Foundation in the United States, researchers found that "girls perform as well as boys on standardized math tests. Although 20 years ago, high school boys performed better than girls in math, the researchers found that is no longer the case.

The reason, they said, is simple: Girls used to take fewer advanced math courses than boys, but now they are taking just as many." However, the study indicated that, while on average boys and girls performed similarly, boys were overrepresented among the very best performers as well as among the very worst.

But Lubos made an important point. What if one of those women menstruates all over something important and breaks the LHC all over again?? :)
I have heard the argument that there are fewer women in physics and that must be fixed but there are more women in physics than there are men in psychology and US high school teaching, yet no one is spending money making special teams of men or doing special awareness programs or asking for quotas.
I will say again the issue is excellence, not fairness. These 588 women are simply better than 588 other people whose spots they took and that is all that matters.

I see this event as a way of complimenting the excellent women scientists who have contributed to the success of CERN. Not all female physicists are excellent, but some are. Women have faced barriers to career advancement at CERN in the past, so CERN wants to make a compensation, and hopes to see more women contributing to the activities of lab in the future. International Women's Day will be celebrated in multiple ways at CERN, and also at FERMILAB. I posted some information a few days ago on my own blog: Collider Blog, on 4-March.

I am continuously amazed at the depth of arguments surrounding intelligence despite the fact that there isn't a single working meaningful definition of the "trait". To even bring up IQ tests, is incorrect since they were, at best, considered a potential indicator of academic potential and were never considered to measure something as nebulous as intelligence.

"Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, Nor hell a fury like a woman scorned," - William Congreve

Now you have offended a women who is way out of your league you insecure, pathetic excuse for a human being. And if you have any decency left in you at all you will apologize to that woman. Otherwise, you will just fade into people's indifference.

You're a clown that no one takes seriously. And the only reason why you're tolerated is because up until now you have been a source of amusement. But, it's not funny anymore, pal....if you catch my drift.

If Lubos comes under attack, I will take a bullet for him. Sure, he always blows things up and 50% of the time he makes no sense, but when it comes to physics he always makes sense and in a world of political correctness gone amok he is a refreshing poke in the eye.

His deviation from the norm in academia also warms my semi-libertarian heart! :)

Lubos is just an old fashion guy who turns the blind eye on women. I know the type from the real world. His way of communicating his lack of respect for women is typical for Eastern Europe. No worries though, I gave him the benefit of a doubt - and he failed. :-)

Smart men tend to respect women. So I don't know what to make out of this being politically incorrect and thus refreshing pokes in the eye to some semi-libertarians.....:-D

My 18 year old son praise his luck of being a man. He has already observed the disadvantages women in even a 'socialist' Scandinavian country (I guess you use this as an example of some sort of hell over the dam...) have.

PS. I think Lubos is in his right to think women are stupid(er) than him. I am defending the freedom of speech - and thought. And my freedom to withdraw from meaningless conversations. It has been kinda fun though. Sometimes meaningless is entertaining :-)

Thanks Eric, but in my view Lubos hurt himself worse than any of us could possibly have done.

There can always be more hurt - I'll lend you my hockey stick if you need it, Bente. :) And another point - the reason men have done the most good and evil in this world is because their dumb asses have been in charge. Perhaps having a few of us women as leaders would prevent some of this crap - for example, going in to Afghanistan and Iraq to see who has the bigger missile, and to try to avenge Daddy? But what do I know, I'm just a mere female. My humble apologies for even trying to post to this thread, as I clearly don't have the intellectual capacity to follow science.

I wish we could put a little banner around our posts that say "sarcasm" or "serious." :) While yes, I think men have colossally screwed up our world, I suppose they've done a little good too. A precious little, hmph. Hey, Hank's a guy, and I think this site is pretty awesome. So, there's one for your gender. And I don't think anything is a protection against stupidity! :)

Not to worry .... I wasn't taking your comment as a serious one anyway. After all, as a male, I'm so used to being insulted these days, it's becoming difficult to take notice .. :)) (**frivolous comment**)

Bah. Try being a white, male, Catholic, Republican raised in the South these days. Those are the 5 demographics I know even the most liberal, caring person feels no guilt at all about bashing.
But like Becky says, I Forrest Gump'ed my way into creating a pretty good science site, so I have that going for me!

Holy crap, it's amazing what kind of aggressive, dishonest human waste is filling Academia. I am quite a hero to have survived for several years in the middle of this hateful far-left feminist multi-Gestapo.

Holy crap, it's amazing what kind of aggressive, dishonest human wasteis filling Academia. I am quite a hero to have survived for severalyears in the middle of this hateful far-left feminist multi-Gestapo.

Feminism originally was an expression used by suffragettes - who were predominantly pro-life[1][2][3] - to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the United States and the United Kingdom. By the 1970s, however, liberals had changed the meaning to represent people who favored abortion and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole.

Specifically, a modern feminist tends to:believe that there are no meaningful differences between men and women (The most significant belief underlying contemporary feminism is that there are no sex differences; therefore advocacy for equal rights must be extended to advocacy for equal results or outcomes.)oppose chivalry and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes)view traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchaldetest women who are happy in traditional roles, such as housewives,[4] and especially dislike those who defend such rolesshirk traditional gender activities, like baking[5]support affirmative action for womenprefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do[6][7]seek women in combat in the military just like men, and coed submarinesrefuse to take her husband's last name when marrying[8]distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (Eg: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";[9] object to other female-only names, such as "temptress"

See what I mean? Phrases like that are gold, I tell you. Other science sites are a lot weaker because they surround themselves with common-cause thinkers and become insular and corroded and, frankly, too self-reverential.
Plus, having met Bente, who is delightfully charming, I can assure you all that within 5 minutes in real life she would have Lubos purring like a kitten.

Thanks, Hank, I am always grateful for your wise, friendly, and yet so mainstream attitudes. I am just not 100% sure whether they would ever save me from physical implications of the feminist and other politically correct wraths if I had to face them from a limited distance again. ;-)

See what I mean? Phrases like that are gold, I tell you. Other science sites are a lot weaker because they surround themselves with common-cause thinkers and become insular and corroded and, frankly, too self-reverential.

An excellent point, Hank!

And, I don't doubt that within 5 minutes in real life Bente, would have Lubos purring like a kitten. ;-)

Well guys, I happen to know personally a bright woman (one of the smartest I know for sure), one which Lubos attacked repeatedly. She might be described as a feminist, although I think it would not do her justice. Anyway, she knows Lubos and she told me that in person she finds him a quite charming and pleasant person.

Agreed, Hank. I usually go by the name 'Viking Lady' and that is fine, I guess. But, then some take it a step further and call me 'Iron Lady' and then I get a bit confused... (Our Scientificblogging's own linguist, Patrick, might find out otherwise, but Bente comes from Benedict and is no where near Margaret. )

I do love this new nick-name 'Feminist Muliti-Gestapo'. Oh, I'm on a total power trip now....

Obviously, with my limited intellectual capacity I could never have invented such an expression - but boy will I act like one big fat 'Feminist Multi-Gestapo! Watch out, world! :-)

I have never claimed that you were necessarily the boss of the feminist SS. And you're surely not unpleasant to communicate with.

The worst feminazi on this thread was called Eric Diaz. Much like the born-again Christians are often the most violent and fundamentalist Christians, men (or people who are men according to their first name, although they're a shame for the men) are typically some of the worst feminists.

People like Eric Diaz have probably bought this propaganda of lies and they must be blaming themselves every day for the presence of the politically incorrect sexual organs. They think that they can compensate their crime of having pr*cks by being pr*cks with respect to the other people themselves.

You know, I have nothing whatsoever against you personally, but I have a lot against the PC feminazi-Gestapo-dominated system. You have surely understood that you were "sucked" into the system exactly because you are a woman, haven't you? I think it's very bad that the men who could have done your job aren't doing it. It's bad for astrophysics, it's bad for the equality of the people, it's bad for the human rights, it's bad for the civilization and its future. It's just bad. It's a crime built upon lies about a "discrimination" against women in the world where every sane person knows has been discriminating against men for 50 years or so.

I wouldn't be surprised if such an internship existed. There exist whole feminist departments of universities. These parasites are never ashamed of anything; they're always ready to steal some extra money from the taxpayer.

yes, I too think this is a move in the right direction, although with ice speed. I think we should not be shy about these kinds of initiatives. They show that there is a problem, but they also show there is somebody trying to work for a solution.

Cheers,T.

PS and, to all the others who hijacked this thread to discuss Lubos' womanophobia: get a life ! ;-)

you shouldn't blame your readers. This is called the market of ideas. They discuss whatever is the most interesting related topic. And as you can see, your humble correspondent is more interesting than the set of all women who work at CERN and their particular celebrations of a discredited socialist holiday.

The only legitimate, censorship-free way to change the situation is for you to actually offer more interesting topics than old discredited feminist socialist holidays.

Every lesbian prefers women - and you are one of them because you have been eliminated from the set that deserves to be called "men". You're an aggressive feminist.Otherwise I have no idea what your comment is referring to.

As mentioned by Lubos the male/female ratio in Nobel prizes and Fields medals has a scientific explanation as due to the difference in the variance of the IQ distributions. This is confirmed by recent EU surveys, that find that women reached men in soft sciences but not in hard sciences.

I see, that's what you meant. Haha. But if I could "come" out more directly on this, to prove that I am a faggot, I would have already been the president of Harvard University because a faggot would surely beat a generic vagina in their PC contest. ;-)